Enter New Comment

Spammers suck - we apologize. Please enter the text shown below to enable your comment (not case sensitive - try as many times as you need to if the first ones are too hard):

Existing User Comments

Title: It works!Name: GabrielDate: 11/1/2013 8:03:25 AMComment: Never mind, I've randle with it. After studying a bit more I discovered that part isn't important, it's like"comment". It's working perfectly! Thanks

Title: TitleName: GabrielDate: 10/31/2013 5:27:41 PMComment: What do you mean with (?<user> at the beginning? I'm having problems to add the regex to my .java file.
I was using this site to help http://www.regexplanet.com/advanced/java/index.html#

Title: TitleName: GabrielDate: 10/31/2013 5:27:28 PMComment: What do you mean with (?<user> at the beginning? I'm having problems to add the regex to my .java file.
I was using this site to help http://www.regexplanet.com/advanced/java/index.html#

Title: TitleName: GabrielDate: 10/31/2013 5:27:09 PMComment: What do you mean with (?<user> at the beginning? I'm having problems to add the regex to my .java file.
I was using this site to help http://www.regexplanet.com/advanced/java/index.html#

Title: RE: You're also missing a lot of the essential things, like comments.Name: Trevor GreenDate: 4/21/2005 2:40:44 AMComment: Yeah - but I'm not validating the entire RFC 822 - only the email address part. As far as I can tell, RFC 822 describes ARPA Internet Text Messages, but in that description it prescribes a syntax for email addresses that we have become familiar with. It is that portion that is validated, the portion that reduces to the non-terminal "addr-spec" (found in RFC 822). I'm sure that if we were validating an entire RFC822 message, then the regular expression that is described in the link that you have given is more appropriate.

Title: You're also missing a lot of the essential things, like comments.Name: Randal L. SchwartzDate: 4/20/2005 1:38:05 PMComment: See http://www.ex-parrot.com/~pdw/Mail-RFC822-Address.html
If it's shorter than that, it's not correct.